Sony A6300/A6500 vs. Fuji XT-2 In terms of IQ Only

[brianrybolt]

If anyone has experience with both of these  cameras, what do you think of the IQ between the two.  Only interested in IQ and NOT about the ergonomics, sensor of the cameras.

Thanks,

Brian

[E.J. Peiker]

If anyone has experience with both of these  cameras, what do you think of the IQ between the two.  Only interested in IQ and NOT about the ergonomics, sensor of the cameras.

Thanks,

Brian

Under most situations you'd be hard pressed to find a difference due to the bodies if everything else is equal.  Note that these two (three) cameras use the same underlying sensor but the filter array is different from the traditional Bayer pattern on the Fuji.  I think more of the IQ differences will come from the native lenses.  And if we just compare the E-mount lenses (not including FE here) for the Sony compared to the Fuji lenses, the Fuji's are for the most part better.  But there are many more third party choices available for E-mount especially if you include some of the excellent FE optics out there.  In the end I think the IQ differences of the cameras themselves are negligible and it becomes more about what lenses and features you prefer and, yes, which ergonomics you prefer

[Paulo Bizarro]

I would add that the lenses used play a significant part in the final IQ equation.

[Eric Brody]

It will be challenging to find someone with experience with the A6500 since it's not yet available. B&H says it will start shipping November 30.
I am a Fuji owner but not a Fuji fanboy. Cameras are tools, complex tools, and to decide between them requires both handling them, eg ergonomics, menus, etc, as well as looking at the quality of the files from the sensor with a "typical" lens, ideally one's most commonly used lens. Lenses cannot realistically be separated from sensors. This is why those cameras with fixed lenses carefully matched to their sensors seem to do so well, eg the Fuji X100 series, the Sony RX1R, and the Sigma DP Merrill's.
You can certainly find examples of files from the Fuji X T-2 and from the Sony 6300 to compare for yourself. Both cameras, being mirrorless with short flange distances, allow the use with adaptors, with varying compromises, of lenses from many manufacturers as well as their own "native" mount lenses. We all pixel peep, even those of us who vehemently deny that we do. I happen to be a sharpness freak, coming from view cameras and high megapixel Nikons before I switched to Fuji. I found that at the sizes I print, from 6x9 to 9x13, to the occasional 13x20, I've been quite happy with what I got from the 16MP Fuji X T-1 and with more time to shoot, process, and print, expect to be even happier with my new 24MP Fuji X T-2. I like Fuji's style and handling and their history of providing improvements via free firmware rather than expensive new bodies. I rented a Sony A7RII a while back to see what I was "missing," and found I was not missing much, so stuck with my Fuji system. The A7RII is a fine camera, make no mistake. The limitations in my photography tend to come from the operator and not often from the equipment, and we're talking about minor variations in excellent equipment in this discussion.
Like any complex system, I suspect isolating just IQ, whatever that really is, will be challenging but go for it and please let us know what you find out. Good luck on your quest, to paraphrase Monty Python and the Holy Grrrrail.

[qwz]

Some things in IQ depends on camera features - like in-body stabilisation for all lens (and possibility to use lower ISO or/and sharper apertures).
No one so far used 6500.6300 and XT-2 looks pretty similar. 6500 possible has a little better high ISO only.
If you are JPEG shooter - Fujifilm offers more options like 'film' profiles. If you are RAW shooter - check what converter works better.
Any of them except native has some limitations. For instance Capture ONE has some features is not available with Fuji X-Trans although C1 has very nice x-trans rendition.

Because this cameras are from one generation, both have 24 megapixels on APS-C more difference (for stills) will be due lens.
For video 6300 has not so good 2K, but very good 4K. Fujifilm has nice 4K too with lesser rolling shutter but with crop-factor. Also Fujifilm has a F-log gamma only via HDMI output.

[jimh]

The a6500 has the same sensor as the a6300.  There's been some vague hype about a "new front-end processor" but no real explanation of its benefits.  We'll be well into 2017 before we see any meaningful reviews; until then it's the usual torrent of "first looks", "hands-on" and recitations of Sony's marketing bullet points.  I think if there was any real improvement in image quality, Sony would be trumpeting it.